his student-days travels, largely on foot in France, the Middle East (Syria, Jordan, etc.); his pre-war archaeological work; the war days; post-war activities working with Churchill; his work on SEVEN PILLARS; his many post-war friendships; his attempts to disappear into the ranks of the various services; his work on Clouds Hill, the cottage he sometimes was able to live in.

I remember reading that Clouds Hill had no indoor plumbing. That he was able to live in it sometimes, strikes me as an achievement.

One of the highlights of Suzle's and my first joint trip to England in the 1980's was our visit to Clouds Hill in Dorset (following visits to Stonehenge and Avebury). At the time part of the cottage's exterior was covered with scaffolding, but the doorway was clear so we could clearly see a Greek inscription over it. I forget the literal translation, but a reasonable rendition is, "What, me worry?"

I would judge he had that put there more in a spirit of optimism than anything else. Because he was clearly a deeply worried man,hence his attempts to reinvent himself and join the forces under an assumed identity. Why, of course, is a much deeper question.

I've noticed the rogue apostrophes in your previous zines but ignored them. I've read zines with far worse errors. Usually, pointing such errors out didn't result in any improvement.

Thank you, Jerry. But I am, none the less, endeavouring to improve.

Nic Farey

Your timing couldn't have been better (since you arrive on a day off) except that I was watching the footy and thus unable to respond with the usual instant insanity. We lost 1-0, so I could have moped off and kicked a copy of PABLO LENNIS to feel better, but ey, why do such a trivial thing when I can write to you instead, which is likely to be less injurious to my kicking foot? As you note, this VT hath "hove into view", no doubt to Brighton my day. (Ahem, and Lord Kettle probably said that hours ago, only for Mike Meara to repeat it many, many times...)

I did used to listen to and mostly enjoy about a half hour's worth (is that a correct apostrophe, T'ed?) of Proms on my way to work since the local public radio station KNPR runs the Uncut Bicycle Treme of the BBC World Service during the silly hour's (that is an incorrect apostrophe, isn't it Te'd?) I'm forced to keep. This year I might have caught ten minutes of some obscure and average Bruckner, I think. It's still better than the news.

We agree fully on the WATCHMEN TV series and the SNOWPIERCER movie. I'm currently recommending TALES FROM THE LOOP (miniseries), review to follow in THIS HERE... #34.

I don't think we have been able to access that over here yet.

Regarding boredom, that occurs as a general ,if hopefully only occasional, occurrence in any group, fanzine or whatever, or in the case of my Watford FC fan group, daily if not hourly as the substantial roster of professional complainers weigh in. Dryness of expression and/or wilful obscurity (of which I'd certainly ask for several offences to be taken into consideration) aren't exactly the same thing, although their effect may be effectively indistinguishable. Speaking of the wilfully obscure, is the Doc being deliberately dim or disingenuous with the "squirrels" comment? I'd hate to have to explain that in all its (is that a correct lack of apostrophe, Ted?) scatological glory, but then again if he'd enjoyed (if that's even possible) a career as a proctologist rather than his more cerebral actual work life, he might have an inkling, something I understand you can get tablets for nowadays.

A last word on accents (including apostrophes): A long-ago Member of Parliament (perhaps from cherished East End parts) was in the Members Bar complaining that he had "an 'orrible 'eadache". The notable F. E. Smith was said to have replied: "Oh my dear fellow! What you need is a couple of aspirates".

Pat Charnock (only thinks this might be a LoC on VT11)

Just a few thoughts:

Your comment, about there's always someone droning on, made me think of Colin Robinson, the energy vampire, in WHAT WE DID IN THE SHADOWS. A lovely series.

It was supposed to be a comedy, I believe.

EVEREST. I meant to respond to this last time, but missed the deadline. I'm a big fan of writer and mountaineer Jon Krakauer, who was a client of Rob Hall on the 1996 Everest climb. He wrote about it for Outside magazine and also wrote a book called INTO THIN AIR (upon which the film EVEREST was based). A really good read. And that led me to take a bit more of an interest in Mount Everest and the stupidity of it all. A horde of grown men and women risking their lives to inch their way up a mountain. And inch their way back down again. And most of the dead ones die on the way down. So I'm with you all the way. And, of course, it's not only the idiots with $65,000 to throw away who die on Everest, it's the guides and the sherpas.

There's a film called LOST ON EVEREST, which is a documentary about a team that searched for the body of Irvine. Mallory and Irvine disappeared on an expedition to Everest in 1922, but it's not known whether or not they managed to summit. Mallory's body was found in 1999, Irvine's body hasn't turned up yet. Irvine was the photographer of the expedition, so the team hoped that if they could find his body, they might find his camera, and proof of whether the pair summited. Which would have been 30 years before Hillary and Tenzing. It was a good documentary, and when they set out for the lower slopes of Everest, after a time spent researching and planning the trip, I was behind them all the way. And then they told us that well, actually, they couldn't resist going for the top now they were there. And they lost me. The plan was that they'd look for Irvine on their way down. And so they did, but by then they were almost out of oxygen and had to do a very quick search from a distance. Poot.

Yes, Pat, I have seen that film. Your sentiments match my own about the wasted opportunity to find Irvine. That, and the stupid attire Mallory and Irvine were wearing, basically 19th Century Alpine dress. I suppose they had the excuse that in 1922 they knew no better, but I suspect that is precisely why they couldn't have summited, because they had no oxygen and no protection from the elements at that height, and they fell due to altitude sickness and/or cold, most likely.

And now Roy Kettle,at long last, though he is responding to #10

It's been interesting reading VT as you've produced them. I'm sorry not to have responded before now (which, inevitably, I blame on stuff) but here's a few thoughts on your books and streaming. I read A MEMORY CALLED EMPIRE a few months ago too, which was fascinating and original. I've been reading a reasonable amount of new SF, some of which now seems to be oldish SF by the time I open my Kindle. I generally get stuff by Adam Roberts and Adrian Tchaikovsky, both of whom I find reliably good and interesting (in the latter case whether it's SF or horror).

Tchaikovsky has also done Fantasy, hasn't he?

The most recent by Roberts is THE COMPELLED, an illustrated book, though not really a graphic novel (not least because it's only part one of a two-part sci-fi novella) and BY THE PRICKING OF HER THUMB (a follow-up to the REAL-TOWN MURDERS). And by Tchaikovsky ,CHILDREN OF RUIN, a sequel to his fabulous CHILDREN OF TIME, one of the most original modern SF novels I've read (not that I've actually read *that* much).

CHILDREN OF TIME was one of the best SF novels, I have ever read. Inevitably, CHILDREN OF RUIN couldn't live up to it's predecessor, partly because if you've read CHILDREN OF TIME, you've got the idea and you know what's going to happen second time around. But it's still good. Adam Roberts I fell out with over a short story a long while back and have avoided. But perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe I should give REAL-TOWN MURDERS a go.

I've bought Susannah Clarke's PIRANESI, which interests me much more than JONATHAN STRANGE & MR.NORREL, though I largely enjoyed the TV series. It sounds like a long Borges story, though "long" is rather against what Borges did and he was, after all, a fucking great writer. And I've bought THE HAIR CARPET WEAVERS, an interesting sounding collection of connected stories by German SF writer Andreas Eschbach from 1995 but recently published by Penguin.

I have downloaded PIRANESI, but I haven't read it yet. RSN.

And NUDIBRANCH by Irenosen Okojie,very well reviewed fantasy and SF stories . Enough to keep me busy for a while. Just reading LOCKDOWN by a thriller writer I like, Peter May. It's a novel he wrote in 2005 about a bird flu pandemic which results in London being locked down. That forms the background to a crime story which works well. He couldn't sell it at the time, apparently because publishers found his idea of a pandemic and lock down implausible, but they were very keen to publish it a few months ago. Anyway, May's version of lock down is a bit more extreme than ours was I'd say - in fact, many people (of those left after 500,000 died) have left London anyway so a lot of it is deserted. And his masked distancing is plausible, though different to ours. The use of the internet is pretty minor (understandable back in 2005) so that's one of the most significant differences. Not the greatest novel, but readable.

Back in 2005, someone should have told the bloke”Be careful what you wish for!”

We both enjoyed PERRY MASON a lot. Didn't fancy LITTLE BIRDS after reading a few reviews. But very much enjoyed the 2011 version of MILDRED PIERCE with Kate Winslet which we missed first time round but recently came back onto Sky Atlantic (through Now TV) and was a terrific and apparently very faithful version of James Cain's novel. Apart from Kate Winslet, it also had sex. Often with Kate Winslet. (Was that just for Nic's benefit?) Like PERRY MASON, very well placed in its time-setting, with some excellent set pieces. Slow-paced but all the better for it.

As I remember, in that adaptation of MILDRED PIERCE, they still didn't reinstate the spanking scene that Cain wrote in the book, and has been usually censored ever since, not just on screen but even by his publishers. But for me, I'm afraid Kate Winslet is nowhere compared to Joan Crawford in the part.

Kathleen hasn't been watching LOVECRAFT COUNTRY(somewhat taken aback by the violence, monsters and gore in the first episode, all of which happily continue through the remaining episodes). I'm afraid I'd portrayed it as more like the novel, in which the graphic Lovecraftian evil comes to the fore later on as I recalled, with more emphasis on the racism and the production of the Safe Negro Travel Guide for a while. Not that they were missing from the streaming version. It is a struggle making sense of everything in the TV version but for complex productions like that I often make use of the range of recap analyses available online after each episode which add interestingly to what I've just seen.

Personally, I think that's cheating.

But the series I'm enjoying more than others at the moment is (second series just finished), based on a graphic novel about superheroes created and run by a company for commercial reasons, some of whom are psychopaths or idiots who like the good life the company provides and the adulation of the public. Great special effects, lots of violence and sex – makes LOVECRAFT COUNTRY seem almost prudish by comparison, complex plot and good satire, not least (without mentioning him) of Trump's America. THE BOYS are a group of mainly humans opposed to them. Very watchable indeed. If you like that sort of thing. Most of the superheroes are take-offs of recognisable DC ones - a version of (Homelander - quite the best and most vile I've seen on TV), and of the Flash, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and so on. Some of the powers that other rather hidden-away superheroes have are a bit bizarre - one guy simply has a very long penis which he uses to strangle people. Very different to, of course, the excellent recent version of WATCHMEN, but comparable in production values and writing.

I've been avoiding THE BOYS because basically, I don't like superheroes and I've read about the political subtext, which I'm trying to avoid. But you sure do give it a good write up. Maybe I'll give it a go after all. WATCHMEN ( in any version) isn't about superheroes though, is it? People who think they are superheroes, maybe. And people whose superpowers make them less than superheroes.

Anyway, enough for now. Looking forward to the next ish.

Please don't leave it another 11 issues before favouring us with your input, Roy. We live in uncertain times.

Well, since the last ish, LOVECRAFT COUNTRY came to an end at last, and I feel cheated and conned. I've watched all ten episodes, and didn't see Cthulu once. This is despite him appearing in trailers and on posters. Who can I complain to? I regret the whole waste of time, and I doubt I will sit through a second season. Meanwhile , WATCHMEN is over after only nine episodes. It was absolutely brilliant, by contrast and I didn't want it to end.

On Sky One, they have started on BRAVE NEW WORLD. The main problem with this is that, whereas back in the 60's the world created by Aldous Huxley looked great, and maybe even plausible to a sex and drugs obsessed youth,now it looks about as likely as Grimms Fairy Tales. Huxley's vision is only the backdrop to a tale of haves versus have nots, by the look of it. The writers have created a sort of theme park of Life As It Used To Be, inhabited by real people who are not partakers of the New London visible on the horizon, and from which day trippers come and marvel at the backward primitives. From this, you can more or less guess what will happen next, and I'm not sure I will have enough motivation to stick with it.

The BBC and David Hare continue their romance. David Hare's latest offering is ROADKILL, another story of chicanery in high places this time starring Hugh Laurie as a suave Government minister with many skeletons in his closet, who nevertheless is grimly determined to make his way up the greasy pole. Naturally, there is a doughty journalist , Jennifer Hennessy, who despite being defeated in a court case defending an article she wrote for her newspaper about Hugh Laurie's misdeeds, is likewise grimly determined to bring him down. The problem with this, as with just about everything by David Hare lately, is that there isn't a single likeable character in it. Everybody, seems just as venal as everybody else, and it's depressing. It bears a strong resemblance to COLLATERAL, another short series he did for the BBC back in 2018, thematically if not in plot. Yet, this is the writer who made THE HOURS into a brilliant movie, and also wrote THE READER. Remember that? Roy will. It had Kate Winslet in it. I wish he'd buck up. ( David Hare, not Roy.) But Hugh Laurie is good. He always is.

I think I might give THE UNDOING a go, with Nicole Kidman and Hugh Grant in. These days , I'll watch almost anything with Hugh Grant in.

Has anyone actually seen the movie TENET? I think it's only showing in theatres and I haven't yet plucked up the courage. Apparently it's about a war in the future, with stuff being sent back here involving a reversal of entropy which is not the same thing as time travel. Opinions, even about what the movie is actually about, vary. It's one thing to go and see a movie and be confused, it's quite another be confused before you have even seen the movie.

Let me try and persuade you all to hear the new, and I think so far only, album by Georgia, SEEKING THRILLS. Georgia (a.k.a Georgia Barnes) is a fabulous young multi-instrumentalist, whom you may have caught at Glastonbury the last time. She plays electronic percussion, various synths and guitar and sings. She is brilliant. The single from the album ABOUT WORK THE DANCEFLOOR is on YouTube both in it's official video form and a live performance, and the Glastonbury set is there as well. Give it a go. It's for shaking your old arse to, which is better than staying indoors cowering from the bloody virus.

Not 'arf, pop pickers.

UNCLE JOHNNY